The new Somersett Owners Association Board of Directors (BOD) will be holding their 2nd open Board meeting on Tuesday, February 26th at 5:30 PM in the Loft. For those interested in attending, the meeting agenda may be accessed via the following link: February 26 BOD Meeting Agenda.
All residents are encouraged to attend and provide any comments you may have on the agenda topics or other issues of concern. Also, for those of you who did not attend the January BOD Meeting, this will provide the opportunity to meet your new Directors.
The following questions were submitted to the Reno Parks and Recreation Department regarding status of the Somersett West Park (not yet constructed) that was promised under the Somersett PUD. Responses provided by Jeff Mann (Reno Parks Manager) are included.
Question: Have any funds been set aside (escrow or other dedicated account) for construction of the Somersett West Park?
Response: Yes, Construction Tax Funds are kept in a separate fund. By law, they are restricted for park development within the District from which they are generated. Currently, there is less than $100,000 available for park construction in Somersett.
Question: If future funds (e.g., the $1,000 from new home construction) in the Park District are required, how many new home building permits are still required to initiate park construction?
Response: The estimated construction cost is $575,000 for Somersett West Park and the last trailhead (which is north of the park). Under the development agreement, 52% of future residential construction tax fees go specifically towards the Somersett Park and trailhead and 48% goes toward other parks within the Park District, which includes all of northwest Reno. So that means about 914 more building permits need to be issued before the City has money to start construction of the park, assuming $100,000 is now available.
Question: Is there a projected timetable for construction of the Somersett West Park
Response: No; the City will not begin construction until we have collected sufficient funds. However, either the Developer or the HOA may advance the construction at their expense and then request reimbursement by the City as park district revenues become available.
Question:Is the land to be set aside for the Somersett West Park still in the hands of the Developer (Somersett Development Company), if so, what are the conditions for transfer to the City?
Response: Yes, City is currently working with Developer to transfer clear title of the two properties (park and trailhead).
Question: Has functionality for the Somersett West Park been established? Will a hearing be held whereby Somersett homeowner preferences can be considered?
Response: The park conceptual plan is attached (click to view). This plan was approved by the Developer, the HOA and the City in 2010.
Question: At a recent SOA Board meeting, homeowners were told that once the park was built it would be maintained by SOA funds even though it would be a public park. Is this a correct assessment?
Response: Maintenance responsibility will be shared between HOA and City similar to Somersett East Park, except that HOA is fully responsible for maintenance and operation of the community garden.
Note that the conceptual plan calls for a “Community Garden” theme in addition to child play and picnic areas. Does the Community Garden represent the best use of the Park for the majority of Sommersett residents, or should other avenues be considered? Please provide your comments and participate in the following survey to indicate your preference.
On Thursday, February 14th, at 9:30, there is another PUCN general agenda meeting. This is like the meeting on Jan. 30 where Smart Meters are not on the agenda, but we speak out in the Public Comments section at the end.
WE NEED TO GO and make sure that these new ‘issues’ that NVE are proposing are brought to light. They think they’ve done everything they can to get rid of us. They didn’t want an opt-out; we demanded it and they gave it to us. They didn’t want to make the opt-out option an analog; we demanded it and they gave us the analog. They wanted to charge quite a bit more for the opt-out; we argued and they are charging $52.44 up front and $8.72 per month. We are making headway, inch by inch and we need to keep the pressure on. They are making their own ‘adjustments’ and this has to stop.
Not everybody, but some people are extremely sensitive to electromagnetic Radio Frequency (RF) radiation and are very sick from Smart Meters, even if they don’t have one and are getting radiation from neighboring meters. Everything from headaches to ringing in the ears to nosebleeds to leukemia to heart palpitations to irregular DNA to infant diseases are being reported at an increasingly alarming rate. NVE authorities have claimed these meters to be safe in several studies, none of which were longer than a year. The cumulative and long-term effects of these meters have not been studied here and where it has been studied, the results have been nothing short of frightening. Read this 12/31/2012 BioInitiative Report where 29 scientists and doctors from 11 different countries do in-depth, long-term research on the effects of EMF… and they aren’t good effects.
There have been house fires in several places here in Washoe County directly attributed to the Smart Meter malfunctioning (one on Zermatt Ct. in Montreux and another in Montreux that we know about for sure). NVE stated in a filing last year that a lot of the fires and power surges were the RATEPAYERS fault. Why is it OUR responsibility, when we can’t even access the housing?
They are still charging the $9.25 Basic Service Fee for “meter reading and other administrative costs”, even if you have a Smart Meter where no meter reading is required. And if you opt out, you pay the $9.25 Basic Service Fee + $8.72 for meter reading. This adds up to millions of dollars revenue to Nevada Energy during the trial usage period until 2016.
The fight is not over by a long shot. We have to keep showing them that we are extremely persistent, diligent, will not go away lightly and will seek to expose them along the way.
Why is government pushing this program so hard? It has nothing to do with cost savings and everything to do with CONTROL and we will not back down without a fight.